Magic Fang Question

[Xarlen]

I'd throw my hand in with allowing Magic Fang to effect One natural weapon Type (Claw, Bite, tail).

That's how I read it.

There are Rings of Magic Fang, which give a plus to an attack type, thus I imagine it goes to both (Otherwise, you have to buy two).

Look at Heart of Nightfang Spire. It's listed GP is 6,000. Thus, I assume that this is more then the regular 2,000+ for a +1 weapon, BECAUSE it transfers the bonus to one Type. If it just gave it to one hand, then it'd easily be 2,000 justly.

 

[Mean DM]

I'd throw my hand in with allowing Magic Fang to effect One natural weapon Type (Claw, Bite, tail).

You've changed my mind. I think both attacks now. But as per the spell, it can only effect a "slam, fist, bite, or other natural weapon." Since a claw is not a natural weapon for a human, it can not be fanged. Does this make sense?

Mean DM

 

[Caliban]

You've changed my mind. I think both attacks now. But as per the spell, it can only effect a "slam, fist, bite, or other natural weapon." Since a claw is not a natural weapon for a human, it can not be fanged. Does this make sense?

Mean DM

A fist is a natural weapon for a human, and I would think that it would become a claw or slam if the druid transforms.

 

[Malin Genie]

I think that the intention with Flurry is clearly to allow repeated attacks with the same hand/monk weapon/whatever.

Certainly the 'extra attack but -2 penalty to all attacks', while it might seem analogous to Ambidexterity + TWF is not the same. And while the monk text may be ambiguous, compare Wild Fighting from the Tribal Defender PrC in S&F - the tribal defender gains an extra attack with whatever weapon, one-handed or two-handed, they are using.

Would you argue that if using the 'Lightning Fists' Feat from SnF that each of the two extra attacks must be made with a different limb, needing three castings of Magic Fang ... ?

 

[cappun]

So Mean DM, what is your final conclusion? If cast on a druid's hand(s), does it remain in effect when those hands turn to clawed paws? And if it does stay in effect, does it affect one or both claws of the new form?

 

[Mean DM]

So Mean DM, what is your final conclusion? If cast on a druid's hand(s), does it remain in effect when those hands turn to clawed paws? And if it does stay in effect, does it affect one or both claws of the new form?

It would effect both claws and yes it would stay in effect. The issue for me is whether the +1 fist attack (slam?) of the Druid would be transferable to a +1 claw attack in wildshape. Here is my final conclusion: Upon wild shaping, the druid can specify either a claw or slam attack to be +1 if fang has been previously cast on his/her hands. So the Mean DM speaks.

 

[Caliban]

I think that the intention with Flurry is clearly to allow repeated attacks with the same hand/monk weapon/whatever.

Well, I disagree since it explicitly states the opposite when it comes to the monk weapons.

It doesn't say anything one way or the other when it comes to unarmed strike, but I think it is implied. There's certainly enough vagueness for the DM to rule either way on the unarmed strike version though.

Certainly the 'extra attack but -2 penalty to all attacks', while it might seem analogous to Ambidexterity + TWF is not the same.

As far as I can tell it's identical as far as the game mechanics are concerned, except that you get your full strength bonus to damage even when striking with an off-hand, and it's limited to unarmed strikes and monk weapons.

And while the monk text may be ambiguous, compare Wild Fighting from the Tribal Defender PrC in S&F - the tribal defender gains an extra attack with whatever weapon, one-handed or two-handed, they are using.

I'm don't really see how that has anything to do with a monk, sorry.

Would you argue that if using the 'Lightning Fists' Feat from SnF that each of the two extra attacks must be made with a different limb, needing three castings of Magic Fang ... ?

No, but I would argue that both the extra attacks from "lightning fists" must be made with a different limb than your normal attacks are. (That why it's "Lightning Fists" and not "Lightning Fist".)

You could do your normal attacks with one fist, and the two extra attacks with your other fist, requiring only two castings of Magic Fang.

I don't think it's a big deal either way, that's just what I believe the text for the Flurry of Blows means. I agree that it's not stated as clearly as it could be, and there is some ambiguity there, so this is just my opinion as to the intent behind the ability.

 

[cappun]

It would effect both claws and yes it would stay in effect. The issue for me is whether the +1 fist attack (slam?) of the Druid would be transferable to a +1 claw attack in wildshape. Here is my final conclusion: Upon wild shaping, the druid can specify either a claw or slam attack to be +1 if fang has been previously cast on his/her hands. So the Mean DM speaks.

Sounds fair to me. Thanks

 

[SpikeyFreak]

I don't think it's a big deal either way, that's just what I believe the text for the Flurry of Blows means. I agree that it's not stated as clearly as it could be, and there is some ambiguity there, so this is just my opinion as to the intent behind the ability.

For the record, I agree completely.

--Lackey Spikey

 

[SpikeyFreak]

I'd throw my hand in with allowing Magic Fang to effect One natural weapon Type (Claw, Bite, tail).

That's how I read it.

Too bad that's not what the spell says.

Magic fang gives one natural weapon of the subject a +1 enhancement bonus to attack and damage rolls. The spell can affect a slam attack, fist, bite, or other natural weapon.

The word "type" is no where in the spell description, and neither is anything akin to "primary attacks" or "multiple attacks of the same 'type.'"

--One Clawed Spikey